Overall impression: The reviews for Kingston Residence of Santa Fe are mixed but tilt toward positive for many aspects of daily life and the physical environment. A large portion of reviewers emphasize warm, caring staff; a clean, attractive campus; and a strong array of amenities and social activities. Multiple reviewers highlight the presence of 24-hour nursing, a multi-level care model (independent living, assisted living, memory care), and an impressive state audit result in May 2024, which lends institutional credibility. At the same time, a concerning minority of reviews describe significant clinical and management issues—most notably within memory care and around licensed nursing coverage—that merit careful attention when evaluating the community.
Care quality and clinical staffing: Many families and residents report excellent hands-on care, responsive nurses, effective physical therapy, and quick health-plan adjustments. Positive comments frequently call out compassionate caregivers and good communication (including during COVID). However, several reviews raise serious clinical concerns: reports that RAs do not have nursing capabilities, a shortage of nurses, medication technicians who lack complete knowledge of side effects, and allegations that the Director of Nursing has no clinical experience or behaves unprofessionally. A few reviewers describe alarming incidents—delayed responses, refusal to send residents to the ER, or care decisions they deemed neglectful—which contrast sharply with other accounts of reliable clinical support. This pattern suggests variability in clinical performance and indicates that staffing levels, nursing credentials, and the DON’s oversight are key items to verify in person.
Staff and management: Staff demeanor is one of the most consistently praised features—many reviewers call staff exceptional, friendly, and genuinely caring. Admissions and front-office processes are often described as accommodating, and many residents appreciate the community feel and staff engagement. On the other hand, there are repeated accusations of nepotism, favoritism, and disengaged or aloof management from a subset of reviewers. Opinions about leadership are mixed: some families praise responsiveness and good administration, while others report unprofessional behavior and excuses from administrators regarding clinical leadership. These mixed reports point to variability in managerial effectiveness or differences in individual staff interactions.
Facility, cleanliness, and amenities: The physical environment receives frequent praise. Reviewers describe the building as beautiful, well-kept, light-filled, and nicely furnished—with plants, a lounge, grand piano, lighted walkways, and mountain views. Many apartments are described as spacious with large closets and private balconies. Cleaning and maintenance are praised by many, though a few reviewers report scheduling lapses for room cleaning and isolated housekeeping misses (dust behind TVs, unclean rooms). Overall the facility impression is positive, but cleanliness consistency may vary between units or staff shifts.
Dining and activities: Dining impressions are polarized. Numerous reviewers applaud restaurant-style dining, tasty meals, and special options (some single reviewers specifically liked tilapia, others called the food top-notch or delicious). Conversely, a number of complaints single out food quality in memory care as poor. Activities are generally highlighted as a strength—bingo, exercise classes, weekly museum/library excursions, field trips, music and singing groups, happy hours and barbecues are commonly mentioned—but several reviewers say activities are limited, especially within memory care, where some feel residents receive little engagement. Transportation and organized outings to grocery stores and doctors are frequently appreciated.
Safety, costs, and notable risks: Cost is a common theme—many reviewers describe the community as expensive, and some say memory care is billed at a higher rate than assisted living while not delivering proportionately better care. Importantly, several strongly negative reviews report incidents of neglect, unsafe clinical handling, injury, and refusals to provide emergency care; these are fewer in number but serious in nature and therefore salient. Prospective residents and families should weigh the generally strong audit result and many positive experiences against these reported risks and ask direct, specific questions about staffing ratios, emergency policies, and incident history.
Patterns and recommendations for prospective families: The reviews collectively portray a community with strong physical attributes, active programming for many residents, and staff who frequently go above and beyond—balanced against inconsistent clinical oversight and problematic memory care reports from some families. The most reliable approach for someone considering Kingston Residence of Santa Fe is to tour multiple times, see the memory care unit during activity hours, ask for staffing ratios and the DON’s credentials, review recent incident reports or complaints, confirm how medication administration and emergency transfers are handled, sample dining in the neighborhood where the prospective resident would live, and request references from current families. In short, many residents experience a welcoming, well-run community with comprehensive services and a beautiful campus; however, a non-trivial minority report serious lapses in clinical care and management that should be investigated before placing a loved one there.
